Reading Piper

[Darrell]

Someone mentioned elsewhere on here that reading too much John Piper made them depressed. After reading that I realized that similar feelings are why I've subconsciously avoided Piper after reading only two of his books.

I was sitting here casting about in my mind for a reason and it occurs to me that Piper creates a world of theology that is frankly inhospitable to real human beings.

It's as if he sucks all the humanity out of our consciousness like removing all the air out of the room. And then he demands that we go on breathing like nothing has happened since "that's your duty to God as your creator who demands that you be first and foremost devoted to him whether you have air to breath or not." Never mind that we're lying on the ground choking and gasping and wondering if we ever get to breath again.

In short, the overall impression I get from him (whether deserved or not) is that he is himself very unhappy with his existence. And because of being ill at ease in his own skin he tends to want to deny our actual human condition in favor of a fanciful one in which things work as they ought instead of how they do.

Now some people may say that sounds like utter nonsense because Piper is a very "biblical" writer and is only expounding on some very old ideas in an attempt to make them new -- and to a degree that's true. Yet other Reformed writers such as Tim Keller or John Stott leave me with no such feelings of unease when I read them. Reading those men does not engender the disquiet that follows my soul when perusing Piper.

This leads me to think that it's not so much the words as the tune that put's me off of John Piper's books. It's not so much that he's wrong (although I do sometimes disagree with him) but that somehow behind the words he often seems really depressed about being right. It's a sad time when you finish reading about the glory of God and instead of feeling joy you mostly feel like you need an aspirin and a bit of a lie down.

Perhaps I'm the only one who feels this way about reading Piper but I suspect not. Or perhaps it's simply that sometimes when a person writes they leave a bit more of the ethos own inner struggles infused into the text than they had intended. Either way, I can usually only take him in small doses.

[Presbygirl]

Ummm...yep to all of it. I've watched two sermons of his recently and was "eeyorish" the rest of the day. His lugubrious delivery does permeate the air we breathe and apparently words on pages too. I've only read one of his books, Spectacular Sins. But that book was supposed to be melancholy so I wasn't as affected by it.

[FinallyFree]

I am sorry that was your experience. Mine was the opposite, in fact Piper helped me see the errors of fundyland and escape. For the first time in my life I saw the joy that is in Christ which is outside myself and how I simply need to rest in his grace rather than try doing all sorts of good works.

[Tonx]

I'm sure he must operate on the Hobbesian philosophy of the brutish nature of man. I guess that's why he makes me so uncomfortable, being a Locke fan and all. I could go into this whole spiel about nature vs nurture and good vs evil to defend my argument, but for once, I'll just leave it at that. After all, this is a Piper thread, not a philosophy thread

Man, I'm such a nerd.

[Presbygirl]

I like him and agree with him on many things. If I hadn't been out of Fundyland for so long already, I could definitely see him "helping me find my way out" too. It's just that I can't listen to him for a long time or I do feel depressed just because of his delivery style and tone.

[Darrell]

(08-17-2011 02:08 PM)Presbygirl Wrote:  I like him and agree with him on many things. If I hadn't been out of Fundyland for so long already, I could definitely see him "helping me find my way out" too. It's just that I can't listen to him for a long time or I do feel depressed just because of his delivery style and tone.

Exactly.

[FinallyFree]

(08-17-2011 10:01 PM)Donb123 Wrote:  As far as Piper, my limited experience with him has actually been the opposite. A friend gave me a message of his that was pretty awesome. I mentioned how we are supposed to be "godly" which means emulating the attributes of God but yet God wants glory and worship and we can't do that and why does God need this? It makes him sound like an egomaniac narcissist? The message I listened to by Piper talked about how doing what God wants and doing things for his glory was ultimately for our benefit. In doing what God wants us to do for him it ends up being something he wanted us to do because it was good for us. Rather than God being a narcissist he's just always caring for us. I was very uplifted by this.

This is my experience with Piper as well. He gave me a bigger picture of who God is. Well said Donb123 (i love the sound of that handle btw)

[paul]

Piper's book Desiring God was one of the first that I read on my "way out". I loved the book until the very last chapter. Took me a while to figure out the problem (aside from the obvious idea that Christians should seek out suffering). Finally after talking a bit with a friend, it hit me. I went back and checked it and I had remembered correctly. Every other chapter started with Scripture and fanned out from there the principles he was teaching. The last chapter started with a story of a suffering martyr and piece-mealed scripture to fit where Piper wanted it to.

Haven't read much more from him.